DES MOINES, Iowa (CNN) - Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardsonsaid Saturday that he differs from the leading candidates on one key issue: how the U.S. ends the war in Iraq.

Speaking to approximately 9,000 Iowa Democrats at the Iowa Democratic Party's Jefferson Jackson Dinner in Des Moines, the New Mexico governor said, "The leading candidates are talking about keeping troops [in Iraq] until 2013. Here's my position–I will bring troops back within one year."

Richardson said he'd do it in part by using a Muslim peacekeeping force and diplomacy.

But in his prepared remarks–sent to the media by the campaign almost simultaneously–Richardson went even further than he did in front of the crowd and called out the leading candidates by name.

Asked why Richardson did not name any names during the live speech, a spokesman with the campaign said, "He was caught up in the great reception from the crowd and simply left them out. The fact that we differ on Iraq was nonetheless clear to the caucus goers in attendance."

soundoff(19 Responses)

Richardson means well, but he should talk to Biden the only candidate who I think has a actual plan that makes since. While he's talking to Biden he should arrange a conference call with Clinton,Obama,Edwards they should listen too.

Why is the CNN Ticker so behind the news? Obama knocked it out of the park 2 hours ago with the "Our Moment Is Now" speech which rivaled his "Red State/Blue State" Convention speech in 2004. In this speech I was literally emotional hearing him make the connection between Martin Luther King's "urgency of now" sermons and the urgency in 2008 for new, meaningful change.

The Iowa Jefferson Jackson dinner, often the turning point in the Iowa caucuses, absolutely belonged to Obama tonight - no other candidate even seemed prepared compared to his performance.

A candidate that actually said what he will do ? How refreshing. Although I think his Ideas on getting out of Iraq by 09 are impossible and foolish. I aplaud him for actually saying somthing. Mabey he should try starting of with somthing he might actaully be able to pull off, and I am not being sarcastic, just realistic. The other candidates should take note of mr richardson and try the same thing instead of bashing the other candidates (with the exception of hillary ,its fun to watch )

@John in CA-
I was at the JJ dinner in Des Moines. Didn't see Barack's speech you refer to. I caught some of the end of it on CSpan. I, like the majority of people there, had left already. His speech might have been good, as you say, but unfortunately he was only addressing it to the people he bussed in from Illinois to sit as his supporters.

Richardson should be praised for his relentless stress on a full removal of the troops. Removing some troops and leaving some is not ending the war. Richardson has realized that getting EVERYONE out is the only way for America to regain the respect that it has squandered away in the last 7 years.

That alone is reason enough for him to get his party's nomination. Bush's war of terror in Iraq has been the most dishonest, misguided, mishandled abomination of U.S. foreign policy since sent Americans to get killed in Europe in The Great War, aka World War One. The U.S. needs to leave Iraq yesterday.

Bill Richardson is the best choice for vice-president no matter who the nominee is. He has a lot of foreign policy experience and a few years as understudy to the president will prepare him to hold the office himself later. He would be capable of assuming office in case of the president's inability or death. He is sixty now and would be an asset to a Democratic ticket.

If anyone thinks that any program or policy can be implemented while we are still paying billions and billions of dollars for the Iraq War, they are mistaken. Hillary, Obama and Edwards all have wonderful plans, but as long as we are hemorrhaging money down the Iraqi bottomless pit, we'll never be able to pay for a single one.

Bill Richardson is right on this issue! We must be out. The sooner the better. And he has the experience to know that other Islamic nations will contribute troops, if we help. North African, Bangladesh, Indonesian and Malaysian troops could all be used without igniting regional powers.

As for him being a great VP choice...why bother? He's either the best candidate for the presidency or he isn't. And he clearly is with the most experience and the policies of change. Besides, he's the only candidate that fundamentally changes the electoral college outcome.

What an incredibly stupid comment. To say without knowing the conditions of what will be going on at that time you already have already made up your mind is misleading and naive. The sad part is 30% percent of americans would accept this plan and shows the ignorance of those people as well.